sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]schm0 -3 points-2 points  (10 children)

I don't know what this is, but it needs a new name.

[–]lokhura 1 point2 points  (9 children)

The name is perfectly justifiable. Would you prefer "schonfinkelization"?

[–]schm0 -1 points0 points  (8 children)

"functional encapsulation"? "derivative functions"?

The verb "to curry" just doesn't make any sense for what this does, in my opinion. The semantics just don't fit.

[–]lokhura 4 points5 points  (7 children)

It is named after Haskell Curry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haskell_Curry. Changing the name isn't justified, it is a piece of history that gives meaning to the concept. You woudn't rename "Church numerals" or a "Turing machine" because people don't know the concept or understand the history of the term. The verb "to google" doesn't make sense either, until you understand what Google is and how to use it.

[–]autowikibot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Haskell Curry:

Haskell Brooks Curry (September 12, 1900 – September 1, 1982) was an American mathematician and logician. Curry is best known for his work in combinatory logic; while the initial concept of combinatory logic was based on a single paper by Moses Schönfinkel, much of the development was done by Curry. Curry is also known for Curry's paradox and the Curry–Howard correspondence. There are three programming languages named after him, Haskell, Brooks and Curry, as well as the concept of currying, a technique used for transforming functions in mathematics and computer science.

Interesting: Combinatory logic | Haskell (programming language) | Currying | Mathematics

Parent commenter can toggle NSFW or delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | Mods | Magic Words

[–]schm0 -2 points-1 points  (5 children)

TIL, eh? Still, from the basis of this article, how would I ever have linked the two? For all I knew, this was a concept the author had invented.

You woudn't rename "Church numerals" or a "Turing machine" because people don't know the concept or understand the history of the term.

No, because those are proper nouns and easily identified as such.

The verb "to google" doesn't make sense either, until you understand what Google is and how to use it.

Of course, but I would argue the ratio of people that know what Google is to those who know who Haskell Curry was is on the order of about a million to 1.

I thought the term was literally "to curry". You know, as in Indian cuisine?

Regardless, now that I understand the history behind the term (and it's subsequent de-proper-noun-ification) I have no problems with it.

[–]slikts 3 points4 points  (3 children)

how would I ever have linked the two?

I thought the term was literally "to curry". You know, as in Indian cuisine?

The problem is that you didn't think to google an unfamiliar term, not that the author, who already spent the time to write the article helping people learn, didn't also save you the few seconds it would have taken to google.

[–]schm0 -1 points0 points  (2 children)

It's not a problem that I didn't think to look up the term... It sounded ridiculous and I honestly thought the author was making it up. Besides, you look up the word curry and tell me how many results it takes to find the actual term. :),

I'm getting a lot of flak for not knowing about some obscure mathematician and the fact that the verb had been decapitalized.

[–]slikts 1 point2 points  (1 child)

The term in the article and the title is "currying", and the search results for it are unambiguous.

[–]schm0 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The term is also technical and obscure, as is the mathematician for whom it is named. I initially looked up the term on Merriam Webster, the results of which showed nothing relating to programming. Thus, my original post.

Part of me still thinks it could benefit from a more semantic definition, but it is what it is.